Watson was a woman????
Jan. 8th, 2009 07:29 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
wytchcroftNow I have been reading an amusing speculative treatise by that learned man's man of rugged history Rex Stout.
He declares without fear of disproval that Watson is a woman!
Of course many of you will rear back in alarm - spluttering loud enough to wake the Diogenes yelling, "Nonsense!"
"Heresy!!", "Watson - a woman?!?", "Watson cannot be a woman!", "Holmes is a woman!", some of you, perhaps the bravest, may cough discreetly and declare, "I am a woman."
Well, be that as it may - let us put this aside, such melodrama is unbecoming to the reasoning mind, the deductive faculties are only clouded by emotion.
Let us consider instead more interesting areas of investigation.
If Watson was a woman - WHICH woman? Whom? Or even Who?
Was Watson Dr Who?
And suspects - well the canon is not short of these. Mary Morstan for example -whose name bears such a resemblance to MORAN that one wonders indeed if the dreaded Colonel, he of airguns and tiger hunting,
was in fact not so much the big game shooting, card cheating cad - but rather an irate Victorian father out to rid himself of the man that had made off with his daughter...
And there are other suspects; Kitty Winters - she of the tragic face and vitriol. Could not Watson in fact BE Kitty? It would explain the need for disguise, becoming a man for the sake of distracting unwanted stares. Her sudden appearance to attack the Count at the climax of The Illustrious Client seems quite plausible if this were so.
Of course, above all there is one prime candidate , THE woman for Sherlock Holmes, Irene Adler. Holmes' regard for THE woman is well known - and indeed her abilities match Holmes to an uncanny degree, quick witted, resourceful and a master of disguise - able to change her manner, voice and attire and fool Holmes completely by BECOMING A MAN.
Yes, I think, on reflection that THE woman is a very likely choice.
As to the domestic life these two may have lead - who can say or know - but Victorian prudery and ignorance of the female form (once thinks immediately of John Ruskin) could easily mean Holmes remaining unaware of such a deception for many years. But what indeed if there was discovery? Jealousy? Outrage? THE woman spurned? A romantic holiday for two in Europe suddenly takes a sinister twist...
"If I can't have you Holmes - nobody can!"
"I knew you brought me to these falls for a reason..."
"Yes! - mad laugh etc - YES!!"
"NOOOOOOOoooooooooooooooooooo......"
Indeed a tragic and pitiable fate.
"Biiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiitch!!!!!!!.........."
The eventual return of Holmes can thus be explained on both psychological and practical grounds.
This just in: It was Mrs Hudson.
He declares without fear of disproval that Watson is a woman!
Of course many of you will rear back in alarm - spluttering loud enough to wake the Diogenes yelling, "Nonsense!"
"Heresy!!", "Watson - a woman?!?", "Watson cannot be a woman!", "Holmes is a woman!", some of you, perhaps the bravest, may cough discreetly and declare, "I am a woman."
Well, be that as it may - let us put this aside, such melodrama is unbecoming to the reasoning mind, the deductive faculties are only clouded by emotion.
Let us consider instead more interesting areas of investigation.
If Watson was a woman - WHICH woman? Whom? Or even Who?
Was Watson Dr Who?
And suspects - well the canon is not short of these. Mary Morstan for example -whose name bears such a resemblance to MORAN that one wonders indeed if the dreaded Colonel, he of airguns and tiger hunting,
was in fact not so much the big game shooting, card cheating cad - but rather an irate Victorian father out to rid himself of the man that had made off with his daughter...
And there are other suspects; Kitty Winters - she of the tragic face and vitriol. Could not Watson in fact BE Kitty? It would explain the need for disguise, becoming a man for the sake of distracting unwanted stares. Her sudden appearance to attack the Count at the climax of The Illustrious Client seems quite plausible if this were so.
Of course, above all there is one prime candidate , THE woman for Sherlock Holmes, Irene Adler. Holmes' regard for THE woman is well known - and indeed her abilities match Holmes to an uncanny degree, quick witted, resourceful and a master of disguise - able to change her manner, voice and attire and fool Holmes completely by BECOMING A MAN.
Yes, I think, on reflection that THE woman is a very likely choice.
As to the domestic life these two may have lead - who can say or know - but Victorian prudery and ignorance of the female form (once thinks immediately of John Ruskin) could easily mean Holmes remaining unaware of such a deception for many years. But what indeed if there was discovery? Jealousy? Outrage? THE woman spurned? A romantic holiday for two in Europe suddenly takes a sinister twist...
"If I can't have you Holmes - nobody can!"
"I knew you brought me to these falls for a reason..."
"Yes! - mad laugh etc - YES!!"
"NOOOOOOOoooooooooooooooooooo......"
Indeed a tragic and pitiable fate.
"Biiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiitch!!!!!!!.........."
The eventual return of Holmes can thus be explained on both psychological and practical grounds.
This just in: It was Mrs Hudson.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2009-01-08 08:40 am (UTC)(I know only Russian version of Mrs Rina Zelenaya - and she is so cool!)
no subject
Date: 2009-01-08 08:42 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-01-08 08:44 am (UTC)The linked text is very funny. I thought.:)
no subject
Date: 2009-01-08 09:07 am (UTC):)))))))))
Ouch!
Date: 2009-01-08 09:08 am (UTC)Are ye serious?
Xa! Xa!
Date: 2009-01-08 09:11 am (UTC)every popular fandom has two things...
Date: 2009-01-08 02:06 pm (UTC)Re: every popular fandom has two things...
Date: 2009-01-08 02:17 pm (UTC)though i am not a writer of such stories - they often change the original characters too much, yet i have read them - they are everywhere, sometimes funny, sometimes not.
This tiny piece is really about nothing.
no subject
Date: 2009-01-08 07:33 pm (UTC)Quite fun to read!
:)
no subject
Date: 2009-01-08 07:51 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-01-08 07:53 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-01-12 04:48 pm (UTC)YO! Hahaha
no subject
Date: 2009-01-12 07:06 pm (UTC)"Well your qualifications are obviously not in doubt -
although it might be aswell that I take down your particulars..."
*twinkles*
no subject
Date: 2009-01-12 08:19 pm (UTC)